The first time I ever heard of/saw one of these things was in the show Pluribus, how common are they??
Internet connected breathalyzer… May I ask why? If they need periodic recalibrations all of them don’t need it right now no?
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
I had one disable my car in rush hour traffic in another city on a roadtrip, they had no way to do anything to get me back up and running. I assume this is for those kinds of cases. I was taking up a lane on the interstate with a cop staring at me, trying to hum the little fucker back to life while a tow truck came.
A “cyberattack”? Or vibe coded AI slop running as intended?
A “great question”? Or just AI brain in action?
Only you can explain what the fuck you’re talking about/prevent wildfires
Boo for the cyber attack but fuck people who drive drunk repeatedly to the point of needing an interlock device. Maybe don’t drink and drive you fucking sack of shit.
Not-so hot take: the underlying issue is lack of public transportation.
100% for most places. However I’ll say Ive known alot of folks who will go up into the bush and get blasted only to drive home. I doubt transit would stop that shit.
Never knew anyone who had one, but a friend of mine dated a guy who did. He would beg her to breathe into it for him.
That’s insane but as an alcoholic I can absolutely see someone doing it.
Some are social butterflies who have to be out and about but talk about not learning lessons.
“Not learning lessons” is a pretty mild way to put it.
The only way it isn’t pure evil is if we allow that the alcoholic is not in control of their actions. And if we allow that, they cannot be trusted to drive, or really to even have their freedom. They are 5150, plain and simple.
They’re in control but reaching them is something best done by people like them in my experience.
Logic only goes so far, clearly.
Fuck the lock, ban them from driving. Inexcusable.
Comments sections. Where nuance goes to die. All context is flattened and your views must be expressed as black or white lest you get branded as having the wrong opinion.
Better nuance dies than innocent bystanders as the drunk driver plows into people.
Amen, Lemmy is in the starting stages of how reddit went my brother. It’s inherent to the format
I don’t think alcoholics should be allowed to drive, is that too much to ask?
Driving is a privilege, not a right, and the roads are already dangerous enough as they are.
I understand the dynamics in the US are what they are regarding cars and the lack of public transportation or bicycle infrastructure, but I don’t believe the avoidable deaths are a worthy trade off. Change needs to start somewhere, and excusing the deaths for some artificially created issue is not acceptable.
So… Just tell them that it’s illegal for them to drive? Kind of like how we tell them that it’s illegal to drink and drive but they did that anyway? The point of the lock is that it’s for people who are going to ignore the law anyway. Not having a license does not stop somebody from operating a motor vehicle.
You make a good point. I still don’t have an ounce of patience for alcoholics who drive, but I do agree that it creates a mental trap of “you have a perfectly good car right here if you just stop drinking for 24 hours”
Driving under the influence is a ban able offence (reckless endangerment) in most countries.
So is a proper driver’s ed before giving even a learner’s permit. US loves giving a multi ton killing machine to untrained people with impulse control. And teenagers
I agree with you, but the difference is that, in the US, people NEED to be able to drive to function in society. That’s why the bar has to be so low to get a license.
I’m sure the lives lost were worth it so that alcoholics and irresponsible people can keep functioning in society. /s
It isn’t. Public transit is great. When will it be discovered in America? Who knows.
Perfect solution. Really needs public transit or walkable cities to work so win-win.
Of course better transit is a better solution, but at least while America is waiting for that, ride-hailing services can help fill a gap. Expensive? I have little sympathy for people who drove drunk on that count.
you only need to get caught once for the lock
It’s a shame that it’s only when they get caught. There’s no excuse for driving drunk.
I can think of plenty, just oh shit we have to get to the hospital please take us to the hospital with a legitimate oh shit we have to get to the hospital tends to override most traffic bullshits. Making the judgment of whether something is a legitimate oh shit we need to get to the hospital is why we have EMTs but like, if the Friday night shift knows you have emergencies when you eat buttered popcorn and there’s a new bee movie out they might just expect you to drive yourself (or rather, have a trusted friend and swearing team buddy) because you’re half expecting a damn emergency at the bee movie and you’ve had twelve too many, they know which roads to keep clear of toddlers and the elderly. Damn bees.
There’s a new Bee movie?
i’m shopping the script to paramount. she loses her bee husband in a drunk driving accident and doesn’t know how to handle the steady swarm of bee courting.
If it’s Paramount, you’ll need a MAGA angle, like the drunk driver was a Trans school shooter running from the scene after murdering a class of special needs kids.
For starters.
i figured at paramount the drunk driving accident would sell well, since we’re having it be a “look how cool it is to drive drunk” thing. she was at the wheel and murdered her beesband for fun.
I know someone that did it once and having to have one of these as a result. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.
I know someone that DID IT ONCE and having to have one of these as a result. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.
You mean he got caught once.
“I know someone who only did a murder once and they locked them right up. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.”
Replace murder with any crime.
If you don’t want to face the consequences, don’t do the action that begets the consequences.
TLDR: don’t fuck around if you don’t wanna find out.
Nice straw man. Murder != drunk driving.
Killing someone with your car = murder Fuck drink drivers!
Interlock devices are the bare minimum if you insist on allowing people who have proven they will drive drunk to continue to drive.
I was arguing with the point of “repeatedly” being a determining factor for having to have this device. It’s not reality, once is enough.
Yes, once is enough. Repeatedly should get you banned from driving.
When you consider that most people get away with a crime dozens of times at least before getting caught, then yes being caught once is enough.
sure its not the same, but it gets really close, really fast
Nope, shouldn’t of done it once. Pretty easy to not drink and drive.
have, not of.
deleted by creator
I too have never had a time sensitive emergency
What kind of emergency is more important than the lives of people that might be killed by a drunk driver’s mistake? And how is it impossible to find an alternative solution?
Where do you guys live? Is it America? Because I kinda feel like in America I’m never surprised that someone drove drunk.
(Especially before Uber.)
What emergency is so time sensitive it’s worth killing yourself and a random family for?
The fact that you can’t actually think of an emergency is telling.
Still didn’t name an emergency worth killing yourself and a random family over
honestly, any emergency that involves hitting you and yours. that’s because i don’t feel like remembering them. i’ve been the car that the police pulls over because it’s driving erratically and then takes over driving. it’s an abstract concept to you. not to me.
Having a breathalyzer is letting them off easy, they deserve to lose their license
They lost their license for 2 years. The equipment was required to get it back.
Okay, seems reasonable, why should I reset my opinion?
Hot take but if you need a breathalyzer to drive you don’t deserve to drive anymore.
Yeah, because it so much more smart to just buy another car if someone in your family need a breathalyzer to drive just because of a beer.
I think it as undone, but there was a very serious plan to put breathalyzers in all cars. This cyberattack should give people some pause. https://www.jalopnik.com/the-in-car-breathalyzer-is-only-a-few-years-away-1850268311/
Yessss, we need more tracking in your day to day because drunks, yesssss, or the children, yessss, or uh, err, uhhh, teenagers, yessssss!
Please give us all your data! For safety reasons, yesssssa
This is a great story to illuminate the large number of problems that could be addressed by decent public transit, better options for walking and biking, etc.
And here I was thinking these blow-and-go contraptions were self contained. I should have known better.
They want to be able to remotely disable vehicles, but in the process have made us vulnerable to all sophisticated actors to do so. Our leaders have their priorities all screwed up.
Once again proving backdoors are fucking idiotic.
Not sure that I would really agree that these are backdoor. Since disabling the vehicle remotely is kinda the express intention of this device. Just a consequence of how they designed them to not be circumvented by the operator.
I mean, if someone is responsible enough to brethalyze themselves, they should also be responsible enough to not drive. Hooking the brethalyzer up to the car to disable it seems like a terrible idea.
Deoending on the way it’s implemented, a bad one could brick a car for hours if someone drunk tries it, but there are perfectly sober people who could drive. Or y’know, this shit with someone coming on and remotely disabling things all willy-nilly.
But. That’s the point. If no one breath tests then the car does not start. Hence it being an ignition interlock device. The whole point of the device is to stop drunk people from driving. If there is a sober person then obviously the drunk person should not do the test since that would lock the car.
Why is remote access the intention? Should the device not verify the alchohol % locally and then mechanically allow the car to star or not? What part of that needs any form of remote oversight?
Probably the part where keeping everything local would allow the driver to easily bypass the device. Splice a few wires, and boom. But if it is doing some off-site verification, they’ll be able to immediately know if the device is disabled. Similarly, they could do things like monitor the car’s location in real time, and have it throw up a red flag if the car is moving but the driver hasn’t performed a test. That would be a sign of tampering.
It also allows them to know if the driver fails the test, which is important for probation/parole reasons, where not drinking is often a condition of release. So if they fail the test, it should automatically alert their supervising officer. Can’t do that if it’s all local.
Wait, are you telling me…
…that a device meant to disable a vehicle…
…was used to disable a vehicle?
Whould’ve thought?
Hegseth is gonna be even more angry than
bornnormal when he can’t drive from point a to point b because of this.That’s why he lives in the base. So he doesn’t have to admit he got his license revoked.
To be fair, I too would be angry had I been born normal.
How are these people planning to drive? The cost of fuel is excruciating! If it wasn’t because of Operation Epstein Fury, driving may have been an option.
They just breathe into the gas tank after happy hour.
That’s why you use the ones with the weird salt inside. No computer, no problem !
drinking is some baby idiot garbage
Only those cars that needed a breathalyzer for reasons.
Not much of a loss, I’d say.
2027 mandates every car have this. Its infuriating.
Per bidens Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, that’s going to be every new car starting this year
Not sure how I didn’t hear of this already. Apparently it’s not necessarily a breathalyzer, but the proposals include a camera facing the driver to monitor them and passive monitoring of the air in the car.
I don’t drunk drive and barely even drink, but that’s horrifying. I can’t believe this went under the radar for me.
More garbage that is going to break and cost thousands of dollars to fix in addition to all the violations of privacy. Cars are already advertising to people. Can you imagine if they put a camera inside the vehicle? Why not invest in public transit? That’s a great way to decrease impaired drivers of all stripes as well as help people in general. All this does is funnel more money into auto makers. I am so upset that this is the first I’m hearing of it.
Yeah I’d actually prefer a breathalyzer if they feel they need to do something
Can you imagine if they put a camera inside the vehicle?
There are already cameras inside most new cars, but the purpose is to see if you’re nodding off when driving and such. It’s a good thing to keep unsafe drivers off the road. The bad thing is the lack of privacy regulation.
Passive systems, not a breathalyzer. Still fucking stupid but one can disable the cameras or stop the vehicle from phoning home. They won’t be able to disable your vehicle remotely and it appears to be more a while driving thing rather than a before driving thing.
